We all love the run game!

kchusker_chris said:
knapplc said:
57.38% run. That will leave enough passing to make play-action a threat, but still be more run-centric.
Click to expand...
That's around the number Watson went with too.

4th quarter, 2 minutes left, trailing by 4, Huskers in the red-zone, 3rd and short. Plenty of time, no hurry. Watson check's the sheet. Uses his calculator watch. So far, 60.41% running. Too many. Can't be that predictable. Pass. Incomplete. Now 4th and short. Recalculate. 59.18 running%. We've been too predictable! Watson rubs his temples...stares down the opposing team's DC with his binoculars. They know we're going to run. Damnit I've been too predictable! Watson makes his chess move, calls down the play............Pass. Incomplete. Game Over.

...SOB...should have gone 59.63% running.
Click to expand...
lol!

Damn it all...59.63% would have got it done!!

Well, we just brought in the fullback from Bama. Good chance not for more horizontal passes on 2nd or 3rd and shorts. :)

Fluffball RIP.....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The yearly pass/run percentage is hopefully tied into what the teams strengths are. If the players of a team execute the run plays better than call more running plays. Good to Great play callers are that way not so much by the percentages they call run/pass but its the great play calls in critical situations that makes them so. To be able to take advantage of defensive weaknesses and have the offense execute well is something I hope Beck masters.

 
100/0, 0/100, or anywhere in between. If Nebraska averages 500 ypg (a stretch, I know), does anybody really care if it's done with 450 ypg rushing or 450 ypg passing? I sure don't. As long as the ratio puts TD's on the board. Although, I would suspect that Nebraska's record would likely benefit from 450 ypg rushing more so than passing.

 
With this team, I'd say about 70% run until we have some solid QB/receiver connections proven. It will be interesting to see how the combination of new route technique/schema implemented at the receiver position and the new "attacking" offense gel.

I understand it appears that the speed & triple option + counter progressions are a major part of the package, along with play action emphasizing drag / crossing / and seam routes. Keeping people moving at all times.

We're going use our speed to attack the big ten's slower moving parts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc said:
huskerscott said:
Our offense I dont think can score in under 2 minutes again a pretty good defense. To me the less the defense is on the field the better. In the last 2 games our defense seemed like it was on the field forever at times. In the 2nd half they wore out and couldnt get the big stop or turnover to make a game of it.

So my theory is run the ball, especially considering the personal we have in place, kill the clock. But the key is long sustained drives, you can do it 3 yards,cloud of dust or the mizzou way of just throwing screens and quick slants 5 or 6 yards at a time. Otherwise the defense will be gased.
Click to expand...
Do you mean Watson's offense, our current offensive players, or the new offense Beck is putting in? I don't think we have enough info to make a solid judgment on any of those three, because Watson is gone, the guys last year were hamstrung by Watson, an injured QB and his Freshman-ness, and nobody posting here truly knows what Beck is going to run yet.

Even Michigan with Shoelace could score on decent defenses in under two minutes - all it takes is one missed tackle and Robinson is gone. Same goes for Martinez, and possibly Burkhead, Enunwa, Gilleylen, Reed, etc. We have playmakers who can take it to the house on a single play. It's just a matter of execution.
Click to expand...
I mean our offense in its current state, regardless of who the coordinator is. Most of the talk has been around basically the samething but simplified. Im guessing that the route its gonna take. Yes it takes one missed tackle to make a play go the distance, but it also takes one missed block for a play go wrong. With as good as our defense is, we dont need to score 50 points a game to win.

Just because watson is gone, doesnt mean our offense wont struggle at times this year.

 
I have no opinion on this. I just wanted to post these percentages from the '96 season for perspective.

1997NebraskaCornhuskersIOptionOf-1.png


1997NebraskaCornhuskersIOptionOffen.png


 
huskerscott said:
I mean our offense in its current state, regardless of who the coordinator is. Most of the talk has been around basically the samething but simplified. Im guessing that the route its gonna take. Yes it takes one missed tackle to make a play go the distance, but it also takes one missed block for a play go wrong. With as good as our defense is, we dont need to score 50 points a game to win.

Just because watson is gone, doesnt mean our offense wont struggle at times this year.
Click to expand...
You mean Nebraska? :LOLtartar

OK, sorry. I'm not funny, but I try.

I think your concerns are justified, and in this situation (as in most, like recruiting, the next great QB, the future star RB, the next great long-snapper, etc) it's best to take a cue from our friends in Missouri and wait for the team to "Show Me." Until we DO move the ball down the field and into the end zone on teams like Wiscy, Ohio State, Iowa, etc, there is no reason to believe we will. The "New Offense" has yet to score a point.

It sounds like you and I are being equally pessimistic about things, about 50/50, but I'm on the hopeful side and you're on the cautious side. Slightly different shades of gray.

 
Blaze1up said:
60/40, try and keep it balanced. Success comes from the ground battle, it keeps defenses near the line to get big plays out of your passing game and gives you good clock management.
Click to expand...
Not too mention, you get the running game rolling, you can wear out the front 7 and open up the passing game

 
Good points by a lot of people on this thread. Thanks for the input. Some might think such a topic is silly, but its almost the first thing that Husker fans talk about following a game. Did we run enough? Did we pass too much? Truth is that we need more explosive plays. Score in less plays is always best. When you score quickly and you have an opportunistic defense like Pelini runs...things are going to get dicey for the opposition very quickly. Opposing offenses are more likely to push bad positions and take chances if we are putting up points with our offense. When are we going to start to get more explosive plays? Hard to say. But I will say that the game will be managed better on the offensive side now, and that gives us a lot better chance at a few more points and a lot more consistency.

 
tmfr15 said:
Good points by a lot of people on this thread. Thanks for the input. Some might think such a topic is silly, but its almost the first thing that Husker fans talk about following a game. Did we run enough? Did we pass too much? Truth is that we need more explosive plays. Score in less plays is always best. When you score quickly and you have an opportunistic defense like Pelini runs...things are going to get dicey for the opposition very quickly. Opposing offenses are more likely to push bad positions and take chances if we are putting up points with our offense. When are we going to start to get more explosive plays? Hard to say. But I will say that the game will be managed better on the offensive side now, and that gives us a lot better chance at a few more points and a lot more consistency.
Click to expand...
Last year we were extremely explosive. The problem was, we couldn't grind out a drive. It was either score in 5 plays or less... Or 3 and out.

 
An outsider's opinion, so take it for what it is..

But Strive for an even 50/50 split in yardage, but you always want more rushing attempts than passing.

The higher the better in favor of rushing.

If you're passing more than rushing, you're either coming from behind.. or you're an SEC team running up the score.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top